Riverchase Career Connection Center

The Riverchase Career Connection Center will offer instruction in five areas: building sciences, culinary arts and hospitality, cyber innovation, health sciences, and fire and emergency services.

Hoover school officials say they are concerned that a lack of timeliness on the part of an architectural firm has cost the school system significant money on construction of a career training center in Riverchase.

School officials originally met with the Goodwyn, Mills & Cawood architectural firm in December 2017 and set a budget of $9 million to turn the former Riverchase Middle School into the Riverchase Career Connection Center.

But at a subsequent meeting in March 2018, the architectural firm said it would likely cost $11 million to renovate the building and achieve the goals of the school system.

When bids came in from contractors in September, the lowest bid was $13.46 million.

This morning, when the school board was presented with a proposed budget amendment that would add $3.1 million in expenditures to the 2019 budget, school board members said they were uncomfortable with some of the proposed increases, particularly extra money for Goodwyn, Mills & Cawood.

Tina Hancock, the chief financial officer for the school system, said the architectural fees for Goodwyn, Mills & Cawood increased by $500,000 because the architectural fees are figured as a percentage of the cost of construction work. And $2.5 million needs to be added to the budget due to the increased cost of construction itself, she said.

Hoover schools Superintendent Kathy Murphy said she believes construction costs escalated because of a lack of timeliness on the part of Goodwyn, Mills & Cawood on getting the project going.

There was a significant delay between January and June of 2018, Murphy said. Murphy said she had stressed with Goodwyn, Mills & Cawood the importance of getting the project going, but between January and June, that was not happening, despite her pleas.

Murphy said she believes that the construction bids came in so much higher than expected because of the delays by Goodwyn, Mills & Cawood on getting the project started. Because of the aggressive construction schedule to get renovations completed in time to open the building in August 2019, contractors figured in the cost of overtime to get the job done that quickly, she said.

Tracy Hobson, the school system’s coordinator of operations, said he believes contractors also figured in the cost of penalties if they don’t get the job done by June 1.

Murphy said she plans to have a conversation with Goodwyn, Mills & Cawood about whether the firm’s failure to fulfill the school system’s expectations in a timely manner cost the school system money and, if so, “what part of this does Goodwyn Mills & Cawood intend to eat?”

Hancock said the school system already has paid Goodwyn, Mills & Cawood about half of the extra $500,000 in architectural fees, so about $250,000 is left to be paid.

Efforts to get a comment from Goodwyn, Mills & Cawood about this issue were unsuccessful.

The school system already ended fiscal year 2018 with a $2.7 million deficit, thanks to the Riverchase construction project, Hancock said. Now, the 2019 budget needs amending to include $3.1 million of extra expenditures, $3 million of which is related to the construction project, she said.

The school board today delayed consideration of the budget amendment until further discussions can be held with Goodwyn, Mills & Cawood.

Comments (2)

Not Necessarily

In a perfect world, design, bid and construction happen in a seamless manner. This is not a perfect world, however, and so speed-bumps happen. Apparently in this case, delay by the architectural firm resulted in escalated costs due to increases in costs of materials (can you say TARIFFS) and the need for an accelerated time frame. School starts at a certain time in the year regardless of a firms time frame in getting something started. According to this story, the firm was notified several times that they needed to get the ball rolling and they didn't. I think Mr. Frederick's main line of objection has little to do with the thrust of this story and far more to do with his disapproval of the project and the school board in general.

Jay Peters80 days ago

The School Board is the problem here, again

Don't blame the architects for this; the school board is to blame. when the bids came in, it was up to the school system to accept a bid or redesign the project to reduce its cost and re-bid it; the school system did neither, and it alone is responsible for its inaction. Once a bid is accepted, which is up to the school system to do or not, it is up to the bid-winning general contractor to get construction moving and make sure everything is done on time. The need for this hugely expensive project was quite questionable from the start, and that buck stops with the incompetent school system, which seems incapable of keeping its expenses under control. It keeps crying for more money and wants to increase our property taxes when it should have focused its expenses on its existing schools, instead of trying to add and build a whole new concept of a so-called "career connection center." Hoover kids have built careers for decades without such a center. Remember, the school board could have sold this building for millions, which could and should have eliminated its defict. If it cannot afford what it already has, as the school system has repeatedly claimed, why did it decide to spend so much money to add something new? Only the school system is to blame for its claimed financial woes; it should stop trying to pass the buck to others, in this instance to the architects, who do not have this problem with their other clients. There's your sign, as who is to blame.